Keeping-Tabs-Winter-2023

CASE BRIEF
The Law of Trolling:
Publication Bans in
Regulatory Proceedings
Evan Rankin, 1 Singleton Urquhart Reynolds Vogel LLP
Where regulatory personnel and potential witnesses might face aggressive online trolling as a result
of their involvement in an investigation, can a publication ban be obtained over their names?
According to a recent decision by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice the answer is that witnesses’
identities may be protected, but not those of “public officials.”
Background
In College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario v O’Connor, Ontario’s regulator of physicians
sought publication bans over the name of a Medical Officer of Health (“Dr X”) who had reported
concerns about another physician to the College, the names of two other physicians who had provided
information to the College (the “Potential Witnesses”), as well as the names of the College’s
investigators (the “Investigators”). The motion occurred in the context of several applications for
statutory injunctions which were heard together.
The request was prompted in part by a concern that if the names of these individuals became
public, they would be subjected to intense online harassment. This concern was not baseless. The
physician being investigated, Dr. Phillips, maintained a substantial Twitter following and had earlier
disclosed the names of the Potential Witnesses in a tweet. Several Twitter users began tagging
the Potential Witnesses in Tweets featuring statements such as “You’re complicit in Nuremberg
code violations. The trials will come for you. I will make sure of it” and “Murderer.”
The Decision
Publication bans are only granted in Canada if: (1) court openness poses a serious risk to an important
public interest; (2) the order sought is necessary to prevent this serious risk to the iden-
10 11